Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

General Discussion

morningfog

(18,115 posts) Sun Sep 7, 2014, 11:45 PM Sep 2014

Let's say the US is successful in destroying IS by being the FSA's air force...

The US has already said that Assad has to go. The plan, it seems, is to support, train and be the military air force for the Free Syrian Army, in their effort to destroy IS. They are fighting a bloody and brutal civil war against Assad. DO we go in aiming at Assad, right off the bat? Or do we wait until a convenient moment to pivot to regime change.

And then what?

This is a bad decision. It is by choice. It is pre-emptive.

2 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Let's say the US is successful in destroying IS by being the FSA's air force... (Original Post) morningfog Sep 2014 OP

I believe the neo-con plan is to do both at the same time. Assad by 'accident'. grahamhgreen Sep 2014 #1

Airstrikes alone are incapable of destroying a force AnalystInParadise Sep 2014 #2

grahamhgreen

(15,741 posts)

1. I believe the neo-con plan is to do both at the same time. Assad by 'accident'.

Reply to morningfog (Original post)

Mon Sep 8, 2014, 01:45 AM

Sep 2014

AnalystInParadise

(1,832 posts)

2. Airstrikes alone are incapable of destroying a force

Reply to morningfog (Original post)

Mon Sep 8, 2014, 02:12 AM

Sep 2014

11 years of strikes on Al Qaeda and we are still killing AQ's number two guy

Reply to this discussion